Article 14 of the Constitution of Singapore was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 24, 2012 Good article nominee Listed February 26, 2025 Good article reassessment Delisted
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 12, 2011. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the rights to freedom of speech, assembly and association are only guaranteed by Article 14 of the Singapore Constitution to Singapore citizens?
Current status: Delisted good article

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Freedom of speech Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Singapore High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Law Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Human rights Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Article 14 of the Constitution of Singapore/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lord Roem (talk · contribs) 01:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I will be glad to review this article. My own editorial interest is in the law, and this section of Singapore jurisprudence is right up my alley. I'll do my best to review in a timely manner. At first glance, this article appears to be very strong, and thus any suggested changes will likely be a few minor structural/stylistic changes rather than comments on missing content. If you have any questions whatsoever, please feel free to leave a note on my talk page. Regards, Lord Roem (talk) 01:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	While a bit concerned about the depth of some of the subtopics, I'll take it in good faith that it really takes that much to describe Article 14.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	This is an excellent article. After reviewing it for 25 minutes, reading through a bulk of the content, I feel satisfied that there are no major issues to be fixed. The breath and depth of this article is incredible and I applaud the editors involved for getting it to this status. Congrats! I am moving to promote to GA right now. Lord Roem (talk) 17:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks very much! — SMUconlaw (talk) 21:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria due to uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. Is anyone willing to address this concern, or should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 01:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]